ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments July 2015

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of July 2015. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It took 9 people being slaughtered by a deranged individual hellbent on sending a message of his hatred against a segment of society. This subsequently changed the views of lawmakers on the Confederate Flag.

What is going to be the turning point, or watershed moment for sex offenders?

“What is going to be the turning point, or watershed moment for sex offenders?”

I wish I could answer that, but I don’t know. I’m pretty sure that it’s not going to be registrants and innocent family members being slaughtered in their homes because the government plasters all their personal information on the internet, or suspects in jails being murdered by some cop using inmates as his murder weapon.

I’m pretty confident about this because allot more than 9 registrants, suspects and innocent family members have been murdered and nobody other than us seem to care. In fact these murders are almost not newsworthy in the sense that they fail to trigger the outrage that people who have served their time or are only suspects are being murdered, usually in an egregiously nasty manner.

Exactly! The media and lawmakers don’t WANT to report registrants and their families getting harassed, murdered, property damage etc., out of fear of a paradigm shift. It’s a willful silent genocide with no end in sight. It’s all part of the less-than-zero sympathy, “I care only about the victims” mentality. The rare instances of something happening making the news, the public responds with the predictable: “Good riddance!” or “They had it coming..” or “One less pedo in the world.”

No; I think a more accurate description would be “lying.” If these politicians and everyone else associated with these un-american laws which harm so much and so many told the truth their little soapbox they use to advance their careers would be gone.

I’ve asked the question “how stupid do people have to be to believe these people.” I think pretty stupid, as John Q public can’t seem to be able to tell when they are being lied too.

There will be none. Sex offenders are more hated that atheists (I happen to be both). The conditions are going to continue to get worse and there will be no effort made to make distinctions between offenders and predators.

It would take explaining facts to the public which we all know politicians do NOT want as it makes them less easy to control with simplistic scare tactics.

So I do not see any hope. In fact, I see sex offenders as one of the last minorities that it is still politically correct and accepted to bash verbally and even physically (even to the point of killing) with very little if any outrage or even concern from the average Joe.

Agree that conditions will get worse, but I have no crystal ball looking into the future to tell me there will be no change at some point. You seem to be saying this is not going to be a cake walk to which I also agree. The information I have is that there are people that don’t believe the lies. My wife is one of those average Joes, or rather Janes, and when I went to the protest in Carson, I found that the majority of people there were women, maybe some offenders among them, but I assume they were average Janes who don’t buy into the BS; they have a moral compass that tells them to fight injustice, even without a guarantee of success, and first hand experience of what the registry does. I am glad they didn’t cower down in dispair!
Look back at history, abolitionists numbered a handful of people and took 30 years of seemingly fruitless effort, before the Emancipation Proclamation was signed. Even months before that signature, Mr. Lincoln was trying to appease the slave states by strengthening the fugitive slave act and trying to convince blacks to go back to Africa (PBS series, The Abolitionists).
Now one can argue that registration is akin to slavery, but the idea that all people deserve equal protection under the law is a common theme, and will exert itself again, as it has in the past.

Sometimes I wonder with all this public discourse over the Confederate flag and now the immigration issue, will anti-SRO laws be put on hold? Out here in San Francisco, the young woman randomly shot and killed at Pier 14 has been dominating the headlines with a lot of the vitriolic acid spewed at undocumented Mexican immigrants (the constant pariah). Is it possible, then, that the political focus would shift away from creating illegal SRO bills with the politicos jumping on the anti-immigrant bandwagon to increase votes?

Actually I see discrimination as legion. A more tolerant society tends to not look for groups to scapegoat. Look at that often used example, the Third Reich, they started with eliminating some criminals nobody liked anyway, then it just kept spreading, the deformed, mentally challenged, LGBTQ’s, Jews, Gipsies, Communists, Poles, and who knows where it would have ended if not for the war.

@ NPS,
Doubt that RSO laws will diminish or be put on hold because they’re generally a slam dunk re-election vote for the tough-on-crime-when-it’s-time-to-vote crowd. They’re just trying to add yet another boogeyman.

To NPS: I looked up 1994’s Calif Prop 187 making illegal aliens ineligible for public benefits. I didn’t realize the Federal court case has never been dismissed. The permanent injunction is still in place, and the case has never proceeded to trial. Maybe the scraggly Republican sore losers are lurking behind the pier 14 hoopla.

I certainly agree with you about hoping something takes the pressure off us. Thank God that back in 1994 the Bay Area voted against prop 187. The rest of the state voted for it.

I’m thinking more like a National Enema Month to occupy the American SHEEPLE…..

Actually the 9th circuit ruled Prop 187 as unconstitutional. There was never an appeal making the law null and void. In fact, the governor at the time (Davis) pretty much hammered the final nail in that coffin when he halted any appeal. I did some research and apparently there was a senate bill (396) almost a year ago removing the unenforceable sections of 187. So it’s dead and buried. With the recent events in San Francisco, there is a lot of national media attention on how to move forward with this. Who knows. They may just excavate this.

Supposedly there is now talk of a “Kate’s Law” that would give undocumented immigrants a 5 year federal prison sentence if they tried to come back after deportation. (Doesn’t that kind of defeat the purpose?) All because one pretty girl of privilege gets killed; never mind the countless other people in poor communities who have been victimized by undocumented immigrants. I cannot stand that mentality. “Because MY little girl is killed, I want a law to honor MY child even if it means ripping up the constitution.” These laws are nothing more than selfish acts of retribution that do more harm than good.

compare Calif Prop 187 with Calf. Prop 83

in both vote S.F. country seem to be standing out here.

I m not a stats but just wanted to point this out..

Is this the Edward Snowdon Warned All Act of california…

I see hope in mark leno I was watching him debate the minimum wage bill and he is very intelegent and seems to rely on facts and data

Anyone know what the “Flag Record #” is/means on the reg receipt?

Torified, when I did my annual registration recently, I was asked to complete a duplicate form for the State auditors who were auditing the program. (Before anyone gets too anxious about a State audit, let me tell you from experience that it is standard government practice to audit programs that are funded by taxpayer dollars. Most of the time, the auditors want to find out if the agencies implementing the program – in this case, local law enforcement agencies – are doing so accordingly, completing all forms in a thorough manner, copying down details accurately, etc. This, their focus is rarely on the “clients”, but rather on law enforcement agencies.)

What County/city are you in? I have no such box on my receipt.

Thanks, Harry. It could be a local BPD thing. So far Google isn’t helping.

David, audits are good. They get down to the facts.

I’m not sure. However, all sex offenders’ criminal records are flagged for fast and easy access to a list of all sex offenders. California did that from way back, and in the 1990s, the federal government organized all states on criminal records and had them all flag all sex offender criminal records.

Possibly that flagging on you record is all that refers to.

I’m not sure how California flags them now, but in the past they added a big line on them saying “Sex Offender.” That’s about the first thing anyone looking at that record will see, and it makes it simple and fast to find all sex offenders in a search. Rest assured, any cop pulling you over for a traffic ticket will not miss that line when they punch you into their computer in the car.

In the past, that line remained even after you were allowed to stop registering by obtaining 1203.4 relief, which used to be the standard to stop registering (and you did not have to file an application with the state to stop registering after obtaining 1203.4, it is just automatic, the record showed you had that, so no registration was required, you simply stopped going in. But now, even with the tiers, they want to make us file an application after we reach the tier level! No, that will only be turned against us, that is a major loophole!).

You’re on to something. I think it is a DMV cross reference. No proof yet though.

Well, what I was saying is not tied to your DMV record. I;m not sure why you mentioned that. When I referred to a cop pulling you over for a traffic offense, they have computers in the cars now, and they can look up your criminal record, not just your DMV record.

Some RC’s can’t get certain DLs and that is listed in the DMV. So they all MIGHT be listed there and only certain ones are banned from driving an ambulance, for example. That’s what I was trying to say.

Well, I’m not sure, but I don’t think the DMV keeps any such record. I think they simply file for a record check when you want something, use that for their actions at that time, and don’t keep it on file. Any time they review you they have to check, because something might have happened since they last checked, and not just a conviction but also something like a COR or even pardon, or maybe an reversal on appeal. I’m sure they don’t keep a running record, and I doubt they keep an old one.

The cops who pull you over will be checking the state Justice Department record, not the DMV. They want to know who they are dealing with, whether to arrest them, is he dangerous in any way, or do I want to kick the sh– out of him. And oh, it shows you should have registered again by yesterday, but it does not show that you have done so, so we will have to take you to jail, this is how we handle Chesters.

Does anyone know of anyone who got off the website? I have a 311.11A and I think my probation report from 6 years ago will say they were younger than 16. What are my chances of getting off the website?

Worse than they might have been a year ago. Now, Kamala Harris is in a campaign to be US senator, and she’s not going to do anything that gets anyone complaining about her being easy on sex offenders. Not that she’s ever done us any favors.

The “treatment” facility I’m forced to attend as a condition of parole appears to have lost their state contract 3ish weeks ago. Anybody have any news on this?

I don’t have information for you NotLikingCalifornia, however, I would be interested in knowing more about the facility in question. I have substantial issues with the techniques of “treatment” these providers get away with.

What would you like to know?
Basic structure is twice a week, 75minutes each, in a small (10-12ppl) group of sex offenders on parole and a group leader (psychologist).
Additionally, there is an hour one-on-one meeting with the group leader monthly.
Every 6-12 months there is a polygraph test.
When admitted to the program, you do a one-on-one interview that is basically history, case factors, etc. Additionally, you take an ABEL test, which is a computer test that is designed to test for attraction to minors (theory is that you will unintentionally spend slightly longer periods of time looking at pictures you’re attracted to and slightly less time looking at pictures that repulse you).

That’s about it. My group leader was really good. Classes are largely unhelpful for any sort of “treatment,” but they can be an outlet where you can talk to other people in a similar position, complain about parole, find out about jobs, places to live, etc.

Apart from wasting a ton of my time, I can’t say that it did anything but help me. I passed the polygraph and had nothing but good reports from my leader, and I had conditions removed as a result, as well as getting less supervision.

I know some of you might be tired of seeing this motion in different stages of completion but I like to share my thoughts and stratagies that I will eventually file in the CA courts. So any feedback is great.

This court has jurisdiction because ________________________________________________________________

I the plaintiff  ______________________do hereby bring forth this motion for Declaratory and/or Injunction relief. This motion is being brought forth as a as applied challenge to the constitutionality of the sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act) as applied to me.


I am the plaintiff in this case. I am a United States citizen who resides in Sacramento, CA.
I am a non-violent, non-contact first time ex-offender from a incident that occurred over a decade ago. There was never any physical contact between myself and any victim. I completed my prison sentence and parole supervision without any incidents or violations despite all the obstacles and conditions of parole that were placed on me because of the sex offender designation. I have been arrest free and a completely law abiding citizen since my release. I do not pose any cognizable risk to the public. I was already severely punished for my offense and have been subjected to intensive monitoring and supervision while on parole. I should not be subjected to these registration and notification laws that involve consequences that are severely detrimental to so many aspects of my life.


(1) The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act) violate my constitutionally protected liberty interest in my reputation which is protected under the federal due process clause in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution with an irrefutable presumption of future offending that is universally untrue.

(2) The sex offender registration and notification laws (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act) violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution.

(3) Sex offender registration and notification laws (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act) violate my constitutionally protected liberty interests by infringing on my freedom of movement and my freedom of association which is protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution.

(4) Sex offender registration and notification laws (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act) violate my constitutionally protected right to liberty and to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive official actions, which is protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution.


(1) My constitutionally-protected right to reputation is encroached upon by an irrefutable presumption of future offending that is universally untrue.

These laws effectively brand me a “sex offender”, i.e., a public danger, for life. See Doe v. Pataki, 3 F. Supp. 2d 456, 467 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) [here in after Pataki III]; Doe v. Attorney General, 686 N.E.2d 1007, 1013 (Mass. 1997) [hereinafter Doe II];see also Bohn v. County of Dakota, 772 F.2d 1433, 1436 n.4 (8th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1014 (1986).

Specifically, the public notification provisions imply that I am potentially dangerous, thereby undermining my reputation and standing in the community. Doe v. Poritz, 662 A.2d 367, 419 (N.J. 1995); cf. Neal v. Shimoda, 131 F.3d 818, 829 (9th Cir. 1997) (noting that “[o]ne need only look to the increasingly popular ‘Megan’s laws’, whereby states require sex offenders to register with law enforcement officials, who are then authorized to release information about the sex offender to the public, to comprehend the stigmatizing consequences of being labeled a sex offender”). Indeed, public notification that I am a convicted sex offender implicitly announces that, in the eyes of the State, I present a risk of committing another sex offense. Doe II, 686 N.E.2d at 144.

The sex offender registration and notification laws violate my liberty interest in my reputation by making public my current personal address and current photo which is not public information and which puts me in physical harm every time I enter or leave my home and even while I’m in my home I can not feel safe. This information is also being publicly distributed on the Internet from privately owned and operated websites such as That information being made public puts not only myself but my families lives and property in danger of physical harm, harassment and vandalism. These claims are not hypothetical situations or exaggerations, these claims are facts and the possibilities of these incidents occurring are real and in fact some have already occurred in my case. The Megan’s law website also displays my criminal record which is only available to authorized individuals who meet certain criteria and have a need to know basis, not to the general public at a click of a computer mouse.
These laws affect and limit employment as very few employers will hire me simply because I am on a sex offender website that is accessible to the general public. These laws also restrict or limit my ability to travel for work or to be employed by local, state or federal agencies and severely affects my ability to obtain a business licence or business loans. They also limit what professions and careers that I can pursue and affect my personal and professional relationships in a severely negative way because of my inclusion on the sex offender registry and the publicly accessible Megan’s law website. These issues are not minor inconveniences but are major obstacles to my financial stability and to my fundamental right to life and liberty for me and my family. It also affects housing because very few property owners or property management organizations will rent to me for fear of vandalism and or the loss of present or potential tenants because of the accessibility to the registry by the general public. I am reluctant to move or purchase property for fear that I may violate some local ordinance or be forced to move because of some new law or ordinance being enacted and applied retroactively. I am also reluctant to move or purchase property for fear that I will be subjected to even worse harassment and vandalism by the community in which I move then I have already endured in my present location. These laws create real fears of being the victim of vigilante attacks, harassment and vandalism which forces me limit my activities to avoid being outside of my residence for fear of being harmed or harassed. I have had to call the police twice due to my family and I being physically threatened in one instance and having threats and profanity written all over our porch on the second incident simply because my information is on the Megan’s law website. My family and I have had our vehicles vandalized and our life’s threatened because I am subject to these registration and public notification laws. These laws cause me severe psychosocial stresses that cause major mental disorders such as major depression and anxiety disorders which can and do affect my ability to perform job duties or perform normal daily activities and to reintegrate into society. Once again these are not hypothetical, exaggerated incidents that have happened to other people but personal experiences in my case. I cannot move forward or successively reintegrate back into society because of all the collateral consequences caused by the registration and public notification laws.These collateral consequences will continue to cause me irreparable damage to my liberty interest as long as I am subjected to these registration and notification laws.

I have a liberty interest protected by the Constitution that entitles me to procedural due process because of: (1) the public disclosure of accumulated and synthesized personal information that would not otherwise be easily available; (2) the harm to my personal and professional life; (3) the foreseeable harm to my reputation; and (4) the statutory branding of me as a public danger, i.e., as a sex offender. I note that the “interest cannot be captured in a single word or phrase. It is an interest in knowing when the government is moving against you and why it has singled you out for special attention. It is an interest in avoiding the secret machinations of a Star Chamber.” Noble, 964 P.2d at 995.

(2) The sex offender registration and notification regulations are discriminating irrationally among classes of ex-offenders which violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment.

All sex offenders fall into the classification of felons and felons are a group or classification. The question is, are sex offenders being treated the same as all other felons, do other felons have to register or have the community notified of their presence after they have completed their sentence, are they being denied state and government services, are other felons restricted where they can live, work and recreate, do other felons face criminal prosecution, a felony offense which is punishable by three or more years in state prison, not for engaging in any type of criminal conduct but simply for not providing personal information to the government within a certain time frame? The anwser is, no they are not. The courts have found that a distinction among members of the class of offenders is irrational regardless of the importance of public safety consideration underlying the regulations or relevance of prior convictions simply discerning any regulatory reason, however plausible, will not serve to satisfy the rational basis requirement of equal protection; relevant inquiry more properly focuses on whether the means utilized to carry out the regulatory purpose substantially furthers that end.

These laws do not substantially further the legislative objectives of increasing public safety, reducing sexual abuse or preventing recidivism as evidenced in the following reports and actual facts from the leading authorities on this subject.

California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13)

Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety.

The full report is available online at.

National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America.

The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual re offending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual re offense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses.

The full report is available online at.

The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483

The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of ineffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates.

The full report is available online at.

From Justice Policy Institute.
Estimated cost to implement SORNA
Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M.

For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work.

These conclusions are virtually the same in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community.

The sources relied upon by the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe, a heavily cited constitutional decision on sex offender registries, in fact provide no support at all for the facts about sex offender re-offense rates that the Court treats as central to its constitutional conclusions. This misreading of the social science was abetted in part by the Solicitor General’s misrepresentations in the amicus brief it filed in this case. The false “facts” stated in the opinion have since been relied upon repeatedly by other courts in their own constitutional decisions, thus infecting an entire field of law as well as policy making by legislative bodies. Recent decisions by the Pennsylvania and California supreme courts establish principles that would support major judicial reforms of sex offender registries, if they were applied to the actual facts.

I am asking this court to apply the actual facts submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following.

California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB)

Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% (page 38)

The full report is available online at.

Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013

Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up
The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates.

The full report is available online at.

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today.

The full report is available online at.

Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy.

A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7%

Link to Report:

Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009.

The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%

Link to Report:

These conclusions are virtually the same in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community.

(3) The sex offender registration and notification laws violate my right to freedom of movement and freedom of association by severely curtailing my ability to travel both interstate and intrastate and also international travel. With all the different state laws and local ordinances that are in place and the constant introduction of new legislation in the different states and the constantly changing local ordinances in thousands of cities and counties across the country, it makes it virtually impossible for me to travel or visit anywhere in this country without a very real fear and potential for violating one of these laws or ordinances. It is virtually impossible for a person of average intelligence to research, assimilate and abide by all the different state laws and local ordinances that apply to registered sex offenders across the country. I can not visit family or friends without extensive research of local ordinances and state laws and even after extensive research I still fear I could have missed one of these laws or ordinances. I can not attend meetings or protest that occur in places that prohibit registered sex offenders from being present. The punishments for violating one of these laws or ordinances are severe. The registration and notification laws makes it virtually impossible for me to travel to a multitude of major countries in the world as they are notified by our government of my registration status so therefore I am denied entry. These are not hypothetical situations and are not minor inconveniences of registration but are major violations of my constitutional rights to liberty. These violations will continue to cause me irreparable damage as long as I am subjected to these registration and notification laws.

(4). The sex offender registration and notification laws violate my right to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive official actions. These laws are completely irrational as applied to me in my case since I currently pose no cognizable risk of re offense. Since I am a non-violent, non-contact, first time ex-offender from a incident that occurred over a decade ago there is no rational basis to continue to subject me to these laws that have consequences that destabilize my life, restricts my abilities to reintegrate into society and have been shown to actually increase known risk factors for re-offense while not achieving any legislative objective of preventing sexual abuse, increasing public safety or reducing recidivism. Since these laws have been seen as strictly regulatory in nature and not considered part of the punishment for an offense, there must be some evidence that the regulations actually achieve some legislative objective. These laws were originally designed to give law enforcement a tool to investigate and apprehend sexually violent predators, child abductors/rapist and habitual repeat offenders when such acts have been committed in the community but have since been expanded to the point to make the registration and notification laws useless to law enforcement or the general public. Just because these laws are so popular within the legislature or the public does not mean that there is a rational basis for such laws. With the facts and evidence of all the destabilizing collateral consequences I endure and all the recent research done on this subject there is overwhelming evidence that these laws are completely irrational and counterproductive especially when applied to non-violent, first time offenders such as myself who currently pose no cognizable risk of re-offense.


(1) The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law, (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act. ) as applied to me, severely violate my fundamental liberty rights to my reputation and to my right to due process.

(2). The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law, (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act. ) violate the equal protection clause.

(3)  The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law, (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act. ) violate my freedom of movement and freedom of association.

(4). The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megan’s law, (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act. ) violate my right to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive official actions.

Supreme Court Justice Brandeis noted that the Founding Fathers
recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.
Olmstead v. United States,277 U.S. 438, 478 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting), overruled in part by Berger v. New York,388 U.S. 41 (1967) and Katz v. United States,389 U.S. 347 (1967).

Law enforcement already has accessible records of my criminal record, including my DNA, my photograph and my complete set of prints and can easily locate me if they were to implicate me in a crime in the future. That process is the alternative to sex offender registration and notification laws and is the least restrictive measure that is available to the government that is related to the legislative objectives of increasing public safety and preventing recidivism. Furthermore, the government already has a meaningful process to determine if an individual poses a significant risk for re offense before ever releasing the person from custody. It is available in the states civil commitment statues. If a person is found to present a potentially high risk of re offense then that individual is confined under the civil commitment statues until it is determined that they no longer pose a risk to the public.
It is in the public best interest to grant me this relief as it will increase my ability to reintegrate into society and increase the probability that I will maintain stability in my life and be a law abiding, productive member of society which actually decreases my risk for re-offense even further. It will also allow governmental agencies and law enforcement agencies to re-direct their limited resources to monitor high risk offenders more intensively thereby increasing public safety. It will also save the state tax payer dollars that can be used for policies that have proven to actually be effective.
These laws will continue to cause me irreparable damage if the court fails to grant me relief.
No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so.

I pray the court grant me Declaratory relief and/or Injunction relief or any other relief the court deems necessary and to enjoin local, state, and federal agencies from requiring me to register as a sex offender and subjecting me to the public notification laws or Megan’s law (CA Penal Code § 290, Sex Offender Registration Act. ) .

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to my knowledge on __________ Signed: _____________________________

What do you do when the fight is gone? I see small victories, little battles being won, but there is a continual beat-down of registered citizens and I’m so tired. We have a victory and a new law is passed to snatch it away from us. I really just want to run away somewhere. Too old to start over, too tired to keep working 60 hrs a week for basic sustenance. I’m sentenced to a lifetime of this crap and doomed to die as a registered citizen with no real allegiance to the country I fought for. So freaking depressing…What’s so difficult is that I was a fighter, gained clearance per 1203.4 but that doesn’t mean a thing, still not eligible for a COR. I’ll snap out of this funk, but getting depressed is becoming more and more frequent. Glad I’m not alone in this.

@mch: doesn’t the 1203.4 help with a job? It’s expunged and won’t show up. Unless you’re on the public website, you should have a LOT more opportunities for jobs.

Thanks for the encouragement Quint. I’ll keep fighting. I have a steady income, barely livable, but steady. At age 65, not too many will hire a man in my situation.
Every day I am compelled to give back to society to make up for my one bad choice in life. I just would like to see an end to it all, for everybody.

Actually, Quint, you are mistaken. They will get the previous expunged case. The whom?

The record remains, it simply is noted on it that it was dismissed pursuant to 1203.4. The record is not erased, it is not as if it no longer exists, the word Conviction will remain to be seen but will be followed by a line noting the 1203.4 relief.

My long story — sorry, got carried away, but some might find the info interesting:

And the courts now say it is not even an expungment, that “the conviction remains,” the person is merely relieved of certain disabilities, such as they can say for CERTAIN jobs that they have not been convicted, although after hiring, the boss can check the record, so then you will have some explaining to do, such as why t=does this say conviction up here, and what’s this 1203.4 thing — and when he finds out, maybe not agreeing with it, in the wrong way.

1203.4 is something, but can be a double-edged sword.

The court attitude in taking this interpretation of 1203.4 — instead of barring the disabilities from continuing, as the court easily could have done — was a quiet but major step. I’ve read it quoted in many cases. 1203.4 had been protecting us. Probation was the test of whether you were rehabilitated, not a COR. In fact, probation was sometimes referred to as “statutory rehabilitation.” They would not even let you apply for a COR if you already had 1203.4 relief — hey, I tried since I knew the record remained and was available, and they keep all sex offender records until you turn 100 years old (and you’re on lifetime registration requirement).

1203.4 was what granted you the relief you worked for and earned, including relief from the registration requirement. 1203.4 was the standard for relief from registration, but that bar has now been raised from an entitlement, which 1203.4 is, to a capricious COR for which any excuse can justify denying it.

The court’s attitude was based on the conflict of continuing to apply some restrictions even after 1203.4 relief. After 1203.4 was originally adopted, it was amended many times, and in more recent years kept adding on more and more restrictions, and even costs (this is what happens when you have to file an application, they are going to use it to nail you at whatever level they want. They will even deny that the 1203.4 language specifically says that your previous plea, your verdict or other finding of guilt is set aside, you enter a not guilty plea, and the case is dismissed on that basis. Yet, the clear language that there is no conviction and only a plea of not guilty, and the case was dropped somehow leaves you convicted.)

So, they can get all the record they ever get. They simply are supposed to pretend it doesn’t matter, and the fact that you got fired a month later for being 5 minutes late is justified.

Curious, so 1203.4 used to grant relief from registration? But nowadays, it isn’t. Well, isn’t that adding more penalties for an SO? And isn’t this proof of added punitive damage?

The main Golden State statute that applies to these types of awards is California Civil Code Section 3294, which states as follows:

“In an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, the plaintiff, in addition to the actual damages, may recover damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.”

The added burden can be construed as oppression. Especially if there is proof that 1203.4 did relieve registration and now does not.

I have no idea if 1203.4 did relieve one from registration. If a document existed in fact that it did at one time and now is not, then I suppose one can invoke the “after the fact” argument. But the real test would be if any persons qualified for it because if you were convicted recently, then I’m not sure they qualify because it wasn’t changed; it was a the new standard.

Unless it can be filed as a classification thing as an SO lawsuit. But I don’t see anything that reveals 1203.4 did relieve registration. Yet I did find one of your previous posts about 1203.4 giving relief, Anonymous Nobody. I think someone in Alaska won their “after the fact” case for registration. Another person won in a different state too, which also pointed to the Alaska case. So there is precedent that the state can’t add things on “after the fact”. Yet is this enough proof that shows the state has “added extra punishment” by adding more burden to where there was none before hand for a certain class?

I believe in both the Alaska and Oklahoma won their cases solely on “after the fact” and not challenge present SORN or current registration. Now, if it established fact that the new rule are, in fact, added punishment, then how does it not account as punishment on its own?

This is akin to saying parolees are not affected by living restriction, but those who complete the registration must still abide by the living restriction?

If the Alaska and Oklahoma deem it extra punishment “after the fact”, then isn’t that already proof it is, in fact, punishment?

While that is brought up, also attack the factual evidence that SO’s have a high propensity of re-offending by revealing all the statistical analysis of CASOMB, along with other analysis that shows proof of the contrary. Also, include the research paper by Ira Mark Ellman “Frightening and High”, which reveals the Supreme Court in Smith v Doe relied on false “facts”. There was a Japanese internment person who filed suit vs US on False Facts – WRIT of ERROR CORAM NOBIS.

With the WRIT, the Supreme Court can save face and hide the fact they made a mistake to call registration not a punishment.

Do not settle for tier systems. If one pays their dues, then their dues are paid. No need to continue the punishment, shaming, and restrictions.

Addicted to this web site
Does any one else find them selves tuning into this site more than any thing else?
Is therapy needed ? If it were a porn site I would expect a knock on the door.

Doug, yes, i check tge website frequently

General legal question: How are RCs – or anyone else for that matter – expected to be aware of and obey new laws when we are never notified of those new laws?? When I did my annual registration recently, the signature block at the bottom of the form states something about acknowledging 290 regulations and any other laws that apply to registrants. But how are we to know any new laws? Personally, I have never received any notification of any new laws/requirements. Maybe its about time for lawmakers to start notifying the public of all new laws, rather than hold people accountable for laws they are unaware of.

They don’t care. They want to rearrest you. When it happens, they’ll just say ignorance of the law isn’t an excuse to break the law. It’s a shitty system, but it’s the one in place, so it is incumbent upon us to look after ourselves and others in the community. Hence, helpful websites like this.

mike r: you do yourself a disservice in the conclusion:

The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries.

rather “the data overwhelmingly proves the ineffectiveness of s.o. registries.”

if you are doing this pro se have you considered class action? lawyers drool at those possibilities if you can substantiate your claims and show harm.
I know, live on maui and my wife lives in sweden. the economics of being shunned and the social/governmental shaming keep us apart.
registry is punishment.
the struggle continues.
solidarity, wes.
nb. i am willing to edit/strategize/talk with you on this..if you wish, contact me:

that goes for all who come here..hold your head up. emerge from the mistreatment and the knowledge that our sentences begin anew every day. for today is all we have.

Timmr said “…Emancipation Proclamation was signed. Even months before that signature, Mr. Lincoln was trying to appease the slave states by strengthening the fugitive slave act and trying to convince blacks to go back to Africa (PBS series, The Abolitionists).

In the 1860’s, everyone was racist. Lincoln had to overcome the prevailing racism, which he did. I never heard about Lincoln strengthening the Fugitive Slave Act, but I did hear about him supporting blacks back to Africa. However, just like Gavin Newsom did a 180 on the cameras on the street corners in SF, and just like hopefully Roberts will change his mind on SO registration being like Price Club applications and see how much the conditions of SOR differ now than in 2003, so did Lincoln change his mind and realized black people were not some foreign body that needed to be expelled. He later felt that black people could play a positive role in the life of the nation. He saw how well black troops fought in the Civil War. So about half way through the Civil War, Lincoln changed his mind on sending black people back to Africa, It showed Lincoln wasn’t scared to change his mind once the facts contradicted what he thought before.

Just a reminder when you go in to get your mug shot. Wear a nice shirt and tie. Ask the officer to pretty please include your tie so the RC community will look nicer than the other group.

Wes those statements and all the report statements are verbatim from the reports.

I recently found this study on WAR.

I’m surprised that there hasn’t been any new posts in the last 5 days. There’s a lot of talk about SB448 that we’re neglecting to look at the bigger picture and find more articles/studies that would help build a case against the registry’s ineffective policies.

NPS,thank you for this report. My first conclusion from it is this: those existing programs that include some sort of human to human supervision combined with “helping” a former offender re-integrate into society, like the “Circles of Accountability Program” are more effective in reducing recidivism than the punitive, merely “let’s catch you and confine you” type of programs like GPS, residency restrictions and civil commitment programs, which actually cause more problems than they solve. My hope is to see reports like this tacked onto every legislative act concerning sexual offending, even those that indirectly impact former offenders like the recent prop 47. I am sure the law makers have access to this, but don’t share it with the public they are supposed to serve.

Together we can do great this video and be inspired:


The adult “dating” website,, has been severely compromised to where criminal hackers have obtained virtually every detail of every customer that site ever had, including sexual information, credit card information including home and business addresses, phone numbers, etc. This is not a moral judgment article, but one for legality purposes.


If there is ANYONE who have had an account on the website at any time, then do your best to recall all your interactions you had with that site for any reason. IN PARTICULAR, if you are listed on any sex offender registry, if the criminal scumbag hackers ever do the data dump, your Ashley Madison involvement WILL be connected to your sex offender registration, and it WILL be the focus point of vigilante journalism.

Understand this: the primary target for the criminal hackers will most probably be using the list for blackmail purposes of high-value targets, most probably through bitcoin ransom payments. But the bigger issue that concerns RC’s is that, to gain popular sympatny, the criminal hackers may make a POINT out of identifying RC’s who are on the site, and they will be doing this in the very near future. Law enforcement will then be notified, and have all your information, alongside the jackal vigilante media. If you are on probation or parole that prohibits you from sites such as that, it is best to get legal representation BEFORE the fit hits the shan.

This hack should be considered ANOTHER reason why California should not collect Calif. email accounts.

If money is the problem I’ll give you a job and training. Training is free and clients are everywhere…only catch is you’ll be asked to leverage this position to promote the fight for all of our rights in society. I’m training a few guys right now, but I’m ready to train others. The starting course will take place in your area with hands on one-on-one training. I am a registrant training registrants. Now lets get to work!

Can you be more specific about what training and jobs you are providing for? I appreciate the fact that you are looking at RC’s situations and helping them out. However, it does seem like a multi-level-marketing process, which is actually very difficult to achieve any semblence of an income for the amount of work expended. Thanks.

Eric please forgive my lack of information, but if the media got the scoop on this it’ll undermine our efforts. It’s a hands-on skill. No it’s not any kind of Multi-level-marketing scheme. While at the City of Carson protest recently Janice and I were talking she stated, “many RC’s do well to have their own business”…this is one of those business types. Oh, I helped leverage the community to get two officials elected, one state senator and a county supervisor. Note (hint) never under estimate the power of the mouth of a hairdresser! I’ll be at the meeting in LA Saturday (July 25th) if anyone should have any questions.

Wot about those Republicans ? Goggle “handy list of republican sex offenders, the Constantine report”by Democratic underground, dtd 3/31/15….

I am sure there are Democrats on a sex offender list, along with BC

Anyone know what happened to the dude that started the Sex Offender Issues blog? Is he still running it? Last I knew there were a lot of mods there and I didn’t know if he was still there or not. Hope he stayed out of trouble and is doing all right. He was one of the first to start speaking up loud and clear and he took a lot of heat from PeeJ.

He has done some updating, however, not like he did before. Otherwise, this is all I know.

May want to post as a separate post….

Department of Justice FY2016 Sex Offender programs costs – $78 million


DOJ’s FY16 $28.7 billion budget is $2 billion above FY 2015, creating 2000 new positions.

Some highlights:
Note Pg 10. “ Investments to combat violent crime include resources for the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to investigate violations of the Adam Walsh Act and assists state, local, tribal, and territorial jurisdictions in locating and apprehending an estimated 100,000 non-compliant sex offenders. Funding is also requested to expand officer safety training for USMS operational officers and task force officers.”

DOJ US Marshall Service: FY 2016 Program Changes: Salaries & Expenses
“Adam Walsh Act: $4.7 million and 0 positions additional Funds are requested for non-personnel costs associated with training, operations, and licensing fees. This funding will allow the USMS to support training and continuing education for the USMS Sex Offender investigators; cover costs to plan and execute operations that require extensive coordination with state and local law enforcement agencies; and pay for licensing fees and costs associated with current sex offender tracking databases and computer programs required by investigators to fulfill the Adam Walsh Act (AWA) mission. The current services for this initiative are 211 positions and $56 million.”

DOJ Office of Justice Programs (OJP) FY2016 budget of $4.05 billion was increased 32% funding 46 new positions at $1.4 billion. “OJP includes the budget for the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) and the Byrne Incentive grant program (previously used by the SMART office to advance the Adam Walsh Act). DOJ OJP FY2016 funds $20,000,000 for sex offender management assistance, as authorized by the Adam Walsh Act, and related activities; $1,000,000 for the National Sex Offender Public Web site.”

DOJ USNCB Interpol Washington: FY2016 $32 million budget was extended $1.4 million for 10 new positions.
Link for FY2016 DOJ Interpol congressional brief, note the discussion on the “new” performance metrics for the sex offender green and red notices:

Thanks for posting this. I thought that 100,000-missing-sex-offenders myth had long been laid to rest, but I guess not. That would be almost 1 out of every 8 registered citizens, hardly a credible figure. It sounds like DoJ will try to pull the wool over Congressional eyes any way it can to get the funding it wants.

Oh where did I hear about something so dangerous, but that no one could find it, and data was fabricated, so the government could fund an expensive operation? Oh, that’s it, Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.

Yes, and that’s simply the Justice Department’s costs. Add in every police department and prosecutor office and all the other people involved all over the system and you’ve got some serious money.

Add in the taxes lost due to registrants being jobless or barely employed, and the costs resulting from services they and their families need due to not being able to provide for themselves. They need to start taking inventory and assess the cost of this war on sex. As long as the public is dumb and those who make money off the system as it is call the shots, that’s not going to happen. Don’t see the public getting any smarter at this point.

Torified said “Some RC’s can’t get certain DLs and that is listed in the DMV. So they all MIGHT be listed there and only certain ones are banned from driving an ambulance, for example. That’s what I was trying to say.”

But on that same DMV webpage, it also lists about 15 other categories of criminals that are not allowed to get ambulance licenses. Hueso, by the way, is not allowed to get an ambulance license. I couldn’t imagine the DMV having all these lists of people who cannot get ambulance licenses when its easier just to do a Dept. of Justice backround check in real time. When a cop pulls you over, they already have all your RSO information, and there is no need to do a DMV cross-check. The DMV has already alerted the computer system of police that a driving license is suspended or some similar information, if that is thew case. And they do that for everyone. The police who pull you over may look at the address on your drivers license to see if it matches your registration address and ask questions if it doesn’t match. The police have full access in their cars to all your registration information. No need for a DMV cross-check. Let’s not waste our time on obvious things.

Maybe someone need to tell Hueso,that he is not trusted enough and is not allowed to get an ambulance license and drive one.

Thanks for pointing that out now we have a leverage

Torified said “Anyone know what happened to the dude that started the Sex Offender Issues blog? Is he still running it? Last I knew there were a lot of mods there and I didn’t know if he was still there or not. Hope he stayed out of trouble and is …”

Unless the guy came off as really sketchy, why would you think that because he’s not commenting on the website, that he didn’t stay out of trouble. You’re doing the man a disservice by asking that. Did you know the reoffense rate of RSO’s is under 2%?

Harry said “I am sure there are Democrats on a sex offender list, along with BC”

The Democrats throw their own to the wolves. Republican Vitter admitted to prostitution and begged for forgiveness. He got it and it looks like he’s good-to-go for Governor of Louisiana. Republican Sanford of South Carolina, took trips to South America, on the taxpayers dime, to go meet his lover. Sanford now represents South Carolina in the US Congress. Anthony Weiner ,democrat, on the other hand, never even met the women he communicated with online, was forced to resign and now he can’t even get a job working for Hillary’s campaign without the media bringing up the scandal and calling him Carlos Danger, and reinvigorating the scandal.

Why don’t the politicians and law enforcement want the public educated as to how the laws DON’T work. I was under the impression that a public servant was there to serve all the public, not just ones that agreed with their opinions. prejudices should be left at the door when entering into public office.

Doing some research, and I found a few disturbing issues with regards to Guam’s Code Annotated (their version of the penal code). Read on as this is extremely scary (especially the last section).

§ 89.14. Limitations on the Use of Electronic Mail (e-mail) by Registered Sex Offenders. (a) Any person required to register as a sex offender pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter shall include identifying information in the “reply to” and/or “sender” and/or “from” field(s) in any e-mail account established and used by the registered sex offender. For purposes of this Section, identifying information means the user’s first name, middle initial(s) and last name. Any violation of this paragraph is a third degree felony. (b) Any e-mail address created by a registered sex offender shall be submitted, physically or electronically, to the Superior Court within ten (10) days of the creation of such account. A violation of this paragraph is a petty misdemeanor.

Guam’s code actually dictates the format of an email message by requiring certain information to be present in a specific manner.

Any intended travel plans or arrangements that the sex offender has, whether such travel is to an international jurisdiction or within the United States or its territories. The Offender shall provide such travel plans or arrangements at least twenty-one (21) days in advance of such travel. Information provided by the sex offender shall include the destination and any other information requested by the Judiciary of Guam, Probation Office or the designated Guam agency in charge of managing the Sex Offender Registry; and (M) Miscellaneous. Any other information as may be deemed appropriate by the Judiciary of Guam, Probation Office or the designated Guam agency in charge of managing the Sex Offender Registry.

Guam mandates the 21 day advance notice, EVEN for domestic travel!

Now for the REALLY fun one!

(i) Persons required to register under this Section shall not access, or create or maintain a personal web page, profile, account, password, or user name for: a social networking website; or an instant messaging or chat room program, that permits persons under the age of eighteen (18) years to become a member or to create or maintain a personal web page, unless such social networking website, or an instant messaging or chat room, limits the ability of adult members to add persons under the age of eighteen (18) years as friends, buddies or associates. All computers or devices capable of accessing the internet that are on the registrant’s person, vehicle or home are subject to unannounced searches by law enforcement personnel acting within the scope of their duties while performing a lawful investigation.

1) Guam literally prohibits persons from utilizing any website (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) that allows a minor to be a member.
2) The last section appears to be a 4th amendment waiver! “All computers or devices capable of accessing the internet that are on the registrant’s person, vehicle or home are subject to unannounced searches by law enforcement personnel acting within the scope of their duties while performing a lawful investigation.” Essentially, the way I interpret this section is, so long as law enforcement is conducting a lawful investigation, you are mandated to provide them access to (regardless of location) your electronic internet devices!

This can’t possibly be constitutional!

Guam receives US DOJ funding for being “Adam Walsh Act compliant”

You do realize that Guam is under the jurisdiction of the 9th circuit’s ruling, right?

Addendum for “Lawful searches”: To me, this is a redudancy and unnecessary addition. The ONLY lawful searches are those conducted without warrant by a parole / probation officer for a registrant still under court order, or through a warrant issued by a judge in the conduct of the “lawful investigation.” Any other search should be illegal and invalid, and a registrant should have a right to deny such a search.

Guam travel? These people are nuts!! Are they aware that going from one town in Guam to the neighboring town in Guam is “travel”?? I’d like to watch them stumble all over themselves as they try to agree on an enforceable definition of “travel” (distance? duration? length of stay? mode of conveyance?)

Guam “has put forth exceptional work”. That’s how the SMART/ SORNA report on Guam concludes. They are AWA, as are Marianas and Virgin Islands. But the one U.S. Territory that AWA can’t conquer is Puerto Rico.

I understand that Guam has gone nuts with AWA, but there is no way that it can be constitutional to: 1) prohibit persons not on parole/probation from using specified, legal websites, and 2) waive your 4th amendment rights. Also, I’m not completely sure they can mandate the format and manner of an email.

Guam “has put forth exceptional work”. That’s how the SMART/ SORNA report on Guam concludes. They are AWA, as are Marianas and Virgin Islands. But the one U.S. Territory that AWA can’t conquer is Puerto Rico. I think PR truly can’t afford the unfunded mandate and eats the JAG penalty.

The recent Carson protest was covered fairly positively by the Daily Breeze.

“Convicted sex offenders seeking more rights in Carson”

Just 4 years old news, but heard of it only today: a 2011 novel about a young registered citizen living under the very real Julia Tuttle Causeway in Florida. Well known author, Russell Banks. Book called “The Lost Memory of Skin”. Anyone here read it? Any good ?

Sorry to interrupt any ongoing subjects here.

File this under Stranger Danger Myth. For the past 24 hours, the news out here in the Bay Area has been about the missing 8 year old girl from Santa Cruz. OF COURSE authorities knocked on the doors of and possibly harassed registered citizens. “The apartment complex is such a close community,” according to neighbors. Unfortunately, the news just announced that they found her body in a dumpster. Very sad news.

Who was arrested? Not a registered citizen. Not a stranger. Her 15 year old neighbor.

NPS, I was just reading this horrible story about five minutes ago and didn’t see anything about registered citizens. Before the body was found, at least one citizen was blaming this on all the tolerance in letting so many homeless live in the area, and the fact that this community was in an industrial/commercial zone. That would undoubtedly mean many registered citizens living there as result of Jessica’s Law. A less liberal community would have already rounded up all the homeless and told them to leave or worse. The homeless, instead, helped in the search.
The 15 year old was not charged with anything, and is still a suspect. Nonetheless this story does express that gut reaction people have, that it must have been a stranger, an outsider that did this. They looked right past the evidence that was a few feet from the door.

By the way, I was reading the story in the Washington Post.

It was mentioned that law enforcement was talking to registered citizens. By “talking” I take that to mean “harassing”. This was reported in the San Jose Mercury News when she was still missing, but now since they have a suspect, they’ve probably removed that information. In fact, I tried looking for that original article and came up empty. All articles referencing her missing are gone at this point.

Now Mark Klass is all over the news again due to the Santa Cruz Murder. He’s calling for people to put up more surveillance cameras in their neighborhoods. Not sure how that helps after the fact. But if Mark Klass recommends it, it must be the right thing to do to save a child (even if it wouldn’t have helped in this case).

The irony is that there is a security camera, and that was the image they floated around the media. So obviously it didn’t help much. Due to her age, the first thoughts people have is that she had to have been sexually assaulted. There are no details, yet people are calling for this kid’s head and already marking him a deviant child rapist. I know this is hearsay, but there has been discussion that it could possibly be a freak accident. Supposedly the 15 year old was driving, didn’t see her and accidentally hit and killed her. He panicked and dumped her body. A possible scenario. But again there are no details save for the fact the girl was found clothed. It just irks me that pitchforked masses come out before the details are sorted out. That’s a major problem here in the U.S.

“The pitch forked masses…”

Are you kidding me? Spend some time and do a little research to find out just what happens in other parts of the world where pitch-forked masses really do turn out to lynch, necklace, stone and burn the accused before any type of trial. If you have the stomach for it, there is plenty of video and all-too often the lynchee is a woman or child accused of adultery, witchcraft or dishonoring her family.

There are major problems in the US and people all too often rush to judgement, but Mark Klaas calling for more security cameras is hardly a lynch mob. The problem, in my view, is TOO MUCH TV and a 24-hour news cycle that makes it seems like kids are getting snatched from the streets left and right when the reality is quite the opposite.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the family of that poor little kid. God bless them.

It’s called a metaphor and it was a reference to those commenting on the story in various newspaper sites where people are literally calling for this kid’s head. Thumbs down for not knowing the difference. And by the way, the United States does have a history of lynching particularly during the Jim Crow era.

First off it broke my heart when I found out that they found this girl dead. No parent should ever have to bury a child. My mother had to bury two of her sons. My younger brother died 20 years ago at the age of 17 and my older brother died 10 months later at the age of 22. It’s something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.

The second thought that came to mind after feeling bad for the girls family was where were her parents. I don’t want to kick someone when they are down but it is an obvious question. If someone was watching this child play I feel the chance of something happening to the girl would be decreased significantly.

Now this genius Mark Klass is saying put up cameras. For what reason? So you can video tape the abduction, abuse, and/or murder of your child? Personally I would rather put out the effort to avoid a tragedy than to recover from one. Parents just need to watch their children. Video cameras should be last line of defense but honestly parents just need to be more vigilant.

I agree. When I first heard the story she was missing I shuddered at the notion of my little girl or boy missing and quickly shook the idea out of my head. The news she was found dead sickened my stomach and seeing the reaction of the suspect’s mother, screaming and crying for her 15-year old son, was heart wrenching as well.

I’ve not heard much more than this, but I am still hopeful the suspect is not an RSO.

More cameras? Oy. Mark Klaas, you are not a thinking man. Unless someone is watching them, a (recording) camera will tell you what happened, not what is happening now.

IMO, what we need is more parents watching their children rather that staring at their phones and providing them a safe environment to play in.

When I take my kids to the park there is almost always some kid who’s parents are not in close proximity as they should be. They are siting in the car with the AC on, or sitting in the shade staring at the phone, tablet, etc.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, maybe the parent is sick and on chemo. Getting the kid to the park took all the energy she could muster. Or maybe their eyes are on the phone because they are sending pics of the little one to Daddy who is deployed overseas, or in the hospital. Who knows, but we do need to be more involved with our kids and keep them SAFE.

The Runners and company will use this to make some more “off with the heads of RC” laws. I have a lot questions about Mark Klass charter, I wonder what is in his closet?

Why are some people so interested in making TV shows about the misdeeds of others? “Actor, Law and Order Director Jace Alexander Arrested”. First, guess what he is suspected of doing? Then, look it up.

I have posted before, but sometimes don’t know which area is the best to post in. I find my posts removed. should I just stay with general comments in these cases. maybe the moderator telling where the post was moved to would help.

Secretary of State Alex Padilla announced Tuesday he won’t appeal a voting rights decision against the state, guaranteeing the vote for tens of thousands of felons.

Read more here:

This is so sad to read about. Another RSO takes his life.

He was a good man who had his heart at the wrong place and the wrong time.